PDA

View Full Version : Lightweight Jose Luis Ramirez.Overlooked?



OMG65
05-15-2006, 03:44 PM
Remember 80's lightweight champion Jose Luis Ramirez?
He had a very good record and fought some really good fighters in his day.Arguello in a close split desision loss,Whittaker 2 times,Rosario 2 times,Chavez and Boza Edwards.I thought this guy was pretty underrated and the only fights I remember him losing convincingly was the Camacho fight when Camacho was at his peak(and not punch shy when Rosario made him a runner) and the 2nd Whittaker fight.Other than that, he more than held his own.Where does he rate as a lightweight champion?I never hear anything about this guy.Even back in the 80's I think he was underappreciated.Unfortunately I think the thing that he will be most remembered for was his retaining the lightweight title in a very controversial decision over Whittaker in their first fight.Too bad.

phlboxarc
05-15-2006, 03:53 PM
Ramirez was a smooth southpaw with very good power and sometimes he could be outhustled. You forgot to mention that Ray Mancini won a convincing decision over Ramirez by not giving him room to breathe.

OMG65
05-15-2006, 04:24 PM
Ramirez was a smooth southpaw with very good power and sometimes he could be outhustled. You forgot to mention that Ray Mancini won a convincing decision over Ramirez by not giving him room to breathe.

With Mancini I can believe that.
Actually I just received that fight and haven't yet watched it.I missed it back in the day.

kikibalt
05-15-2006, 05:10 PM
http://i3.tinypic.com/zu1pn8.jpg

http://i3.tinypic.com/zu598i.jpg

Sharkey
05-16-2006, 12:48 PM
He seems to get his just due and then some. Steady fighters that were consistantly good appear to be well regarded when they are done with their careers.

Many I know do less underrating than overrating of him, Rosario and others of the 80's era of lightweights, in my opinion. I think today's variety would be comfortable among them, whereas I am not sure that would be the prevailing thinking.

Ramirez may not be talked about much because for as good as he was, there were clearly better fighters at his weight throughout his career...he never was top-dog. The steadiness and grit that made him a perennial force and a respected fighter wasn't accompanied by any hyperboles, much copy or much of a personality.

I think it may have to do with the fact that, in a TV era, he didn't translate like other fighters in his own division. However, I do not think he is overlooked from a standpoint of how, as a fighter, he is thought of.

hawk5ins
05-16-2006, 04:52 PM
But when I see Ramirez, I see Jose Luis Castillo. A good, solid champion.

I agree with Sharkey's position on Romirez here. With every other fighter out there that fought in or around the division he fought in, 135, did he ever stand out above anyone else?

Same with Castillo. He may be the best lightweight in the world, but during his reign, did he ever clearly outdistance himself form the rest of the pack? getting undeserved decsions agianst Stevie Johnston twice, Imo. Beating anddrawing with (my cards) Mayweather. Struggling to get by Cassamayor. Losing a titanic battle with Corrales and then beating him in the rematch, 12 pounds north of 135 and then looking ordinary agianst Reyes in his last bout.

Has he seperated himself form anyone?

Ramirez had the same type of career.Lost in his first big test agaisnt a faded Olivares. Shined in a loss to Arguello. Lost clearly to Mancini who outboxed him as well as he outbrawled him (Mancini boxed VERY well in that bout.)

Lost decision I thought he deserved agianst Rosario. ANd in the rematch after getting dropped twice, roared back to Stop Edwin in the 4th, in an amazing fight. Less than a year later WIDELY beaten by Camacho who also dropped him.

Wins a vacant title in a bout with Terrance Alli who had no business losing that fight. Alli to me was almost affraid of winning a big fight. He'd get close and then try NOT to lose. And of course he would.

The matchup with Boza, 3 years earlier would have been an amazing bout. But Corny was badly faded. Then a gift decision over Whitaker. Then a Weird bout with Chavez in whihc neither fighter wanted to really fight. ANd then Ramireiz gets stopped on cuts, ON HIS HEAD! (who stops a bout becuase of a cut on your head!?!?!?!) and all of a sudden he acts like he wants to fight. Maybe the only time I ever agreed with Kevin Rooney who announced the bout on HBO with Merchant and Lampley.

Then a Clear loss to Whitaker and essentially his career is over.

Good solid fighter, but never a fighter where anyone would or DID, say: "Wow, this is one of the best fighters in the game! Let's do a fantasy matchup with him and Canzoneri or Ross or Williams!"

He never sparked that much interest, becuase as good and as solid as he was, he wasn't all that interesting, in comparison to his peers in the game at the time.

Not trying to be mean or belittle him. But Ramirez simply wasn't what I would call: Special. Excellent fighter, don't get me wrong. But Underrated? I just don't see it.

Hawk

HE Grant
05-17-2006, 09:02 PM
I still find it hard to believe Mancini beat him. Any debate on if Ramirez took a dive? He was a much better fighter than Mancini. What was up with that fight?

Olympic Auditorium
05-17-2006, 09:39 PM
Ramirez beat Arguello imo.

Sharkey
05-17-2006, 09:42 PM
I will second that. Haven't seen it in years however.

kenmore
05-18-2006, 01:48 AM
I still find it hard to believe Mancini beat him. Any debate on if Ramirez took a dive? He was a much better fighter than Mancini. What was up with that fight?


I remember seeing the fight live on television...it was a very convincing, impressive performance on the part of Mancini. Mancini looked in some ways like a little Joe Frazier, as he kept all over Ramirez from the opening bell until the final round.

Ramirez simply couldn't handle Mancini's pressure tactics, and was forced to concentrate excessively on defense.

I can't imagine that Ramirez took a dive. That would have been hard to pull before a live television audience.

Styles made this fight, and this stylistic match-up worked in favor of Mancini, as Ramirez just didn't seem to know how to handle him.

Remember that Mancini, in spite of his faults, was a strong, tenacious, effective offensive fighter in his prime. In his next fight, as a matter of fact, Mancini used the same tactics to give Alexis Arguello a lot of hell before folding in the later rounds before the Nicaraguan's power and skill.

The Ramirez victory was probably Mancini's finest night as a pro.

HE Grant
05-18-2006, 06:43 AM
Like I said , I find it hard to believe. The man took the best of much better fighters like Rosario and Arguello. Mancini was not that fast or that hard hitting ... something is fishy about that one.

starlingstomp
05-18-2006, 07:14 AM
He took the best of Mancini as well.He just got his arse kicked from pillar to post.

TKO11
05-18-2006, 07:18 AM
kenmore - agreed about the Ramirez fight being possibly Mancini's finest performance. He looked excellent that entire fight.

HE - while I know Boom Boom takes a lot of guff, I don't really understand why you clearly rate him so poorly as a fighter. In fact, though they were very different fighters, I would never say he was a lesser fighter than Rosario. After he won the title Ray's comp was a bit questionable, but until that point the guy looked fantastic in virtually every outing. Not particularly hard-hitting, not terribly fast (or terribly slow), but he fought his guts out every time, was all heart, and was far from unskilled. He was loved because he was all action, and unless you were a really gifted counter puncher, you couldn't keep him off. As kenmore said, he also looked awesome against Arguello until Alex took him too deep, and he showed all kinds of guts in both Bramble fights against a guy that simply had his number.

I was just a kid (early teens) during Ray's heyday, so I have a "loved him when I was a kid" bias. But I really think the guy is underrated regarding what he was capable of and who he was capable of beating.

HE Grant
05-18-2006, 09:14 AM
I don't rate him poor. I like Ray. I think he was couragous, had a good chin, excelent stamina, was exceptionally strong and a good puncher. I simply think he lackd the defensive skills and the skin toughness to be an excellent fighter. He was like a slightly slower version of Hatton. This was proved by his wars with Bramble, a good but not great fighter and the tragic Kim fight.

Ramirez , to me, was a highly underlooked, very tough fighter that fought better names on far more even terms.

hawk5ins
05-18-2006, 09:31 AM
I was a HUGE haward Davis Fan in the early to mid 80's, so as one can imagine, I held a bit of contempt for Boom Boom. But I think Ray's performances agianst Arguello and the Bramble rematch, quality fighters in losing efforts (and the loss in Buffalo to Bramble was highly spirited as well) showed excelelnt qualities in Ray that deserves our respect.

If you add in the one sided spanking of Ramirez (have never heard or read anywhere that there were questions about Jose efforts or it being a shady bout) to me at the very least brings to totality of Ray's career on even terms with Ramirez's, given that Jose does have a few more quality wins.

I think an arguement can be made that based on their head to head matchup, that Ray might deserve the nod.

I don't think it is beyond reason to suggest that ramirez may not have been 100% for his bout with Mancini so a bit of an exscuse could be made for his performance. But then agian, looking at Ramirez's best performances, certainly one could state that Arguello may not have been 100% and Rosario may very well have been a bit overrated.

I gues what I'm saying is, that without anything concrete, to take the value of one performance away from one fighter is a bit unfair, unless the same considerations are made for the other fighter, when nothing tangible is evident for any of them with which to descredit the performances.

Ray looked awesome agianst Ramirez. His pressure AND his boxing skills were on brilliant display that fight. That was the bout in whihc I begurdginly came away realizing that ray had a few more skills than I ever gave him credit for. Granted it was agianst the right type of opponnent, but they were impressive none the less.

I think full credit for the performance belongs to him.

Hawk

phlboxarc
05-18-2006, 09:46 AM
Hawk, Dave Wolfe offered Howard Davis $180,000. to fight Mancini and Davis turned it down saying the amount was an insult. Obviously Davis thought he deserved Sugar Ray Leonard paydays but in reality $180 K was a very good purse at the time. I think Mancini would have swarmed all over Davis. I remember Flash Gordon jumped all over Davis for his attitude in refusing the Mancini match and purse offered saying that Davis must not be very confident of winning.
Chuck

Sharkey
05-18-2006, 10:17 AM
One question for you....

Perhaps in many layers..and after much setting up...


Arguello had major problems with Ramirez, and if memory serves me correct was outworked, floored and deserved to lose that bout. Mancini gave him absolute hell and was able to remain close to Arguello despite Alex's vaunted power.

Which brings me to Chavez.

I have read before that Arguello had too much power and body punching abilities for Chavez...and evidence of such stems from Chavez' own uneven bouts and problems with Taylor employing such warfare at 140...as well as Arguello's abilities when substituted for fighters who gave Chavez problems. Yet, I have always maintained that Chavez' strength, pressure and heavy hands (and aptitude inside) as well as his chin should make HIM the favorite at 135 against Arguello. Chavez' was faster of hand and foot to me, and had a better defense at 135.

Given that Ramirez may have shown Arguello's true competency at that weight when faced with a steady, iron-chinned foe...

Would this not perhaps indicate that Arguello was NOT the force at lightweight that would be favored to beat Chavez in a fantasy bout at that weight?

IE: what makes the Ramirez bout NOT a reflection of Arguello's true competency at 135..at tackling Chavez...if not in general..and if so, why would he be your pick against Chavez.

Second question would be: Have you ever noticed do we rarely agree on matchups such as this...when similarly thought of multiple-weight combatants are matched?

hawk5ins
05-18-2006, 10:20 AM
I don't beleive it was a confidence thing. I think Davis' response about the purse being and insult to HIM, he truly beleived. I agree, that he was a bit delusional to think he deserved SRL money. And he prbably should have taken it, if for no other reason, it possibly could have gotten him the title and THEN he could start making purse demands.

But he was in no position to demand anything, even if Wolfe probably was shart changing him a bit. Howard, in the 80's, that was not an HBO fight. It was a network bout. if Wolfe really wanted to entice Davis, he could have given him closer to a $250K purse. CBS certainly would have financed it. But to do so, wolfe would have had to make Mancini's purse nearly equvilant.

No way would Wolfe ever do a 60-40 split for Mancini. $180k probably was (at best) a 70-30 split in favor of Ray. Did Howard deserve Purse parity? Nope. But the wacko twins, Jones and Rappaport set unrealistic expectations for him early on in his career. And even though they were not with him when Wolfe made the offer, Howard's mindset was already of that ilk.

It was ego not confidence, that led to that bout never happening.

Hawk

Sharkey
05-18-2006, 10:24 AM
As a side note re:Mancini-Ramirez..

It is interesting to note that Camacho forced Ramirez to be inert in their bout by overwhelming Jose Luis with HIS offense.. though it was offense of a different kind.

Similar response by Ramirez when he was fielding many blows...or more accurately when he couldn't set and fire without getting hit in return.

hawk5ins
05-18-2006, 10:38 AM
Re Arguello/Ramirez/Chavez:

I wasn't saying there was definitively that there was anything wrong with Arguello for the Ramirez fight. I was simply making a comparison in that ramirez, who is percieved to be a better fighter than Mancini, got beaten one sidedly. So a suggestion was made that there HAS to have been something funny as it just doesn't sit right.

Along those same lines, Arguello is generally precieved to be a superior fighter to Ramirez at 135. But given that Arguello DID struggle with him (I had Alex winning by two points btw), couldn't likewise something have been up with Alex? But given that there is nothing tangible that anyone can put their finger on for BOTH fights, we have to go on simply, that Mancini was better than Ramirez on the day they fought and Ramirez was a whole lot better than he was percieved to be when he fought Arguello. Or from where you sit, Arguello was not as good as many beleived he was when he faced Ramirez.

I simply don't beleive that the best performance by Arguello. Did it have to do with Ramirez? SOme of it yes. But he did appear sluggish throughout the bout. Just a bit off, but not terrible. And the bout was extremely close.

As far as Chavez goes, certainly, he is going to offer Arguello issues and problems given his skills, Toughness and power. At the same time, Chavez hasn't faced anyone like Arguello who brings that type of Power to the body, skills, physical advantages and quick accurate punching.

I'm not suggesting Arguello walks through and over Chavez. But I do think he beats him. At 130 and 135. And YES. The Arguello that fought Pryor in the first bout, I STILL think he beats the Chavez that faced Taylor at 140.

Just my opinion. I could be wrong.

Hawk

Sharkey
05-18-2006, 11:00 AM
I realize the scarcity argument... IE neither faced someone like the other, is valued and valuable. However, when two fighters are, to me, so evenly matched and thought of, I don't like it's use.

Oh well. I'll take JC at 135 and 140. Both could expolit the other's weknesses...I see Chavez's exploitations as more certain. Arguello's countering comes at the expense of his own vulnerability versus Chaevz. He leads find a steel-chinned foe with superior quickness.

At 130? Not sure.

hawk5ins
05-18-2006, 11:22 AM
My take is I think the body punching of Arguello, drains Chavez and leaves him vulnerable late. Head hunting agianst Chavez is not the way to go. It begins and ends with working the body.

Conversely, Arguello has faired well agianst body punchers, so I don't see Chavez's body work as having as great an effect agianst Arguello as Arguello's would have on Julio.

Hell of a fight either way. IMO at all three weights.

Hawk

Sharkey
05-18-2006, 11:27 AM
Hi, you've reached Sharkey. If I were here, I would not let this go and we would take over the thread for three pages arguing one narrow point. Trying to get all your background thoughts. I know me, and it would happen. Please leave a message after the tone.

Beep.

hawk5ins
05-18-2006, 11:32 AM
That is so you.

Unlike MYSELF, who can easily let go and move on in a moments notice.

Good thing you weren't there, or I might have started developing some bad habits that could rub off on me.

Hawk

kikibalt
05-18-2006, 11:49 AM
In 1985 my sons, Frankie and Bobby and I were working in Hector Camacho's training camp ( for the Ramirez fight ) Frankie and Bobby because they were southpaws were sparring with Camacho an I was helping Jimmy Montoya who trained Hector for his fight with J.L. Ramirez, first in Los Angeles an then in Las Vegas , an I can say that Hector trained really hard for the fight.

BTW Bobby fought on the card an won by ko

Frank B.

Sharkey
05-18-2006, 11:52 AM
Is it true Macho trained to move, move, move, move.... and not be the Machoman for Ramirez? Jose covering up all the time sure presented opportunities for Camacho to plant and blast...and scored a KD.

kikibalt
05-18-2006, 12:27 PM
Sharkey-- Camacho trained to fight his fight, nobody could tell Hector how to fight.
I never thought Machoman was a good moniker for Hector, I know of lots of other fighters that could proudly use that moniker but not Hector, he just'd fight like a machoman imo.

Frank B.

thumper3852
05-18-2006, 12:30 PM
Just looking at the list of names that have been mentioned in this thread makes me a bit nostalgic for those days....pretty damn impressive roster.

Mancini became extremely popular and did so rather rapidly, he was a boxing darling so to speak, because he was good looking, tough and had an exciting style. Davis very likely, and possibly not incorrectly, saw himself as the more accomplished and skilled "boxer" and I can somewhat appreciate him chafing at the shorter money, but Mancini was the draw, no matter what Howard thought. As mentioned, Howard should have taken the 180 thousand and went from there...he would have evened out in a Mancini rematch if he beat Ray. I'm certain Mancini wouldn't have turned down that purse for a shot, or Ramirez, or Rosario for that matter.

Each of the fighters mentioned qualify for deserved high recognition, with Arguello, Chavez, and Whitaker qualifying as great.

Sharkey
05-18-2006, 12:34 PM
just wondering, because I remember before the fight(though young) Hector saying he was going to move and move... and after, I think I recall (read?) he was on his own for 6 rounds and then after that he would have to follow his corner instructions.

Don't think it turned out that way. It was/is odd seeing Ramirez cover up so often when Hector punches. Jose was dominated by a guy who allegedly made no bones about not wanting to mix it up. When they mixed, Hector did all the throwing it seemed.

rocky111
05-18-2006, 02:30 PM
I am a big Mancini fan, feel he was underated and NEVER forgot that he walked INTO Ramerez, (something Alexis and Julio Caesar wisely didnt do, but Edwin Rosario unwisely did) and won every round. Ray as was Luis. was underated. Two very very tuff guys.

OMG65
05-18-2006, 03:19 PM
I thought Mancini was underrated as well.Although I'm biased as I'm an Ohio boy like Ray.He was tough,relentless,strong and gave it his all.Blue collar fighter at the end of a blue collar era.The fans knew this and that's why he was so popular.Not rocket science there.
He just wasn't the same after Kim died.Not saying he would have gone on to have 10 more successful title defenses and win titles in multiple weight classes but I still think he beats Bramble if the Kim tradgedy had not occurred.That's why I wonder what more Ray could have done in boxing.I know his style usually dosen't lend itself to a long prime but I could see a few more successful defenses of the lightweight title .

pendleton23
05-18-2006, 07:16 PM
I actually think Mancini would beat a Hatton if matched up.

kenmore
05-18-2006, 07:59 PM
Like I said , I find it hard to believe. The man took the best of much better fighters like Rosario and Arguello. Mancini was not that fast or that hard hitting ... something is fishy about that one.

I understand what you're saying about how these respective guys stacked up against each other in terms of ability. That's why I think Ramirez got whipped by Mancini for reasons of stylistic match-up, and not because of relative ability levels. Mancini was an exceptionally good pressure fighter, and my guess is that on a mental/tactical level Ramirez just didn't know how to react.

A analogy to Mancini-Ramirez, in my opinion, is the trio of Eddie Gregory, James Scott and Jerry Martin, and how they fared against each other.

Scott gave Gregory a 12 round whipping by using pressure tactics, a la Mancini-Ramirez. Gregory was a better fighter than Scott, but that night he was totally confused about how find the space he needed to get his punches off.

Later, Scott was beaten solidly by Jerry Martin. How did Martin fare against Gregory? Gregory knocked him out with ease.

Dogged, aggressive pressure and tenacious, skilled infighting can be a confusing, befuddling thing for a fighter to cope with. The infighter can sometimes force a more talented and skilled guy into a defensive shell, and keep him there for the duration of bout, piling up points en route to a decision win.

I was never a Mancini fan...but after seeing him handle Ramirez, I had to respect him as a bonafide world-level contender.

gregbeyer
05-22-2006, 11:55 PM
nothing for nothing but i will never forget that ramirez was old friend frankie crawfords last fight. kind of a strange crossing of paths...frankie was on the skids...a sixties fighter and ramirez was in his 26th fight of a very long career.

ramirez was definitely under rated as is mancini these days. i honestly also have no trouble seeing ray giving hatton a very tough fight.

frankie crawford was paralyzed by a gunshot and later took his own life. how he ended up fighting ramirez is mexico always puzzled me. fighters.
greg

Olympic Auditorium
05-24-2006, 01:53 PM
Chavez goes through Arguello like a freight train with no problem,at 130,136,and 140.Sorry Arguello fans I cant see Arguello beating Chavez or Salvador Sanchez at 130.

pendleton23
05-25-2006, 08:18 PM
Chavez goes through Arguello?Keep dreaming.It would never happen.Chavez might even get knocked out by Arguello!!!

thumper3852
05-25-2006, 08:29 PM
"Chavez goes through Arguello?Keep dreaming"


I agree....helluva fight but Chavez' style was perfect for Arguello.

Olympic Auditorium
05-26-2006, 12:23 AM
Arguello knocking out Chavez now you guys are dreaming.Bantamweight Olivares was whipping his ass at 126 how you figure.Ramirez also beat him and was robbed.Chacon was ahead on points when the fight was stopped.Oh Arguello did beat an over the hill Watt for the lightweight title,I bet that was a tough fight.Ill stop now I believe wev'e gone over this already no use in doing over,I just had to lay down some facts

pendleton23
05-26-2006, 12:58 AM
Jim Watt was a very underrated boxer.
Juan Laporte lost a razor thin decision to Chavez.
Rocky Lockridge lost a close decision to Chavez.
Meldrick Taylor lost with 4 seconds remaining.
Frankie Randall dropped Chavez and won.

Arguello CRUSHED MOST of his foes and punch for punch hit much harder then Chavez.

I have Arguello on DVD hitting Boza Edwards so hard in the body Edwards lost control of his bodily functions.

Also have seen Arguello hit someone so hard in the body the opponents leg lifts off the ground.

Chavez NEVER fought anyone who hit as hard as Arguello.

hawk5ins
05-26-2006, 08:06 AM
THat my dear Sharkey, is why I seemingly am so hard on Mr. Chavez. Becuase the majority of my posts dealing with a matchup with Chavez and say an Arguello, either start off with comments such as this or ultimately address this type of thinking.

Yes I know what you are going to say next and yes I SHOULD know better. But after all these years, isn't it obvious that I DON"T know better?

Hawk

OMG65
05-26-2006, 10:31 AM
Jim Watt was a very underrated boxer.
Juan Laporte lost a razor thin decision to Chavez.
Rocky Lockridge lost a close decision to Chavez.
Meldrick Taylor lost with 4 seconds remaining.
Frankie Randall dropped Chavez and won.

Arguello CRUSHED MOST of his foes and punch for punch hit much harder then Chavez.

I have Arguello on DVD hitting Boza Edwards so hard in the body Edwards lost control of his bodily functions.

Also have seen Arguello hit someone so hard in the body the opponents leg lifts off the ground.

Chavez NEVER fought anyone who hit as hard as Arguello.

Don't forget the perfect right hand bomb Arguello put Rooney to sleep with.To me that was one of the greatest punches I have ever seen.It landed with a sickening thud.

HE Grant
05-26-2006, 07:14 PM
You cannot get more diferent than Chavez and Sanchez...I think Alexis would definately stop Chavez late...Sanchez might have given Alexis fits and outboxed him...never hurt him or close to stopping him but Salvador had the guts, boxing skills, speed and chin to be a very tough match up for Alexis...however it could have gone either way...

GanchoIzquierdo
05-29-2006, 05:54 PM
"Chavez NEVER fought anyone who hit as hard as Arguello."

Rosario hit as hard as Arguello. In fact, he might've hit even harder.

hawk5ins
05-30-2006, 09:03 AM
Has harder than Arguello's right was at 135. Maybe.

But Arguello's best punch IMO was the left to the body. Arguello, I beleive was CLEARLY the superior and harder hitting TWO fisted fighter. And Arguello's left, was IMO, harder than Rosario's right.

Hawk

GanchoIzquierdo
05-30-2006, 10:29 AM
I think you bring up very good points, Hawk, although I do remember Jose Luis mentioning that he found Edwin to be the harder punching of the two. In any case, I brought him up in reference to the post about Chavez never having fought anyone with Arguello-like power, which I obviously don't agree with.

Capslock
06-29-2006, 06:50 PM
He was a great body puncher.